www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Papal Infallibility

Ray,

Your views on what constitutes a heretic are quite interesting and thought-provoking. The only problem I have with them is that they seem not to be supported by the history of the Church. How many time has the Church repeated that all Protestants are heretics. What I've heard is that those who headed the Reformation/began the heresy are "formal heretics" and that those who were born and raised in these heretical ecclesiastical communities are "material heretics." But, ISTM, that the Church has repeatedly referred to heretical groups as heretics in a group, rather than claiming that only their founder was a heretic.

This is my question: has the Church done a complete 180 in terms of how she views heretics?

Logos Teen

Brethren:

Ray has described in more detail and with more compassion and meaning the basic formula that I have posted several times in the past.

In order to be an heretic one must:

1. Teach a false doctrine.

2. Be informed of the incorrectness of the doctrine by competent ecclesial authority. And

3. Lead a schism based upon that false doctrine.

One cannot be an heretic because one's grandfather was an heretic. Those who divide the Church using false doctrines can be called heretics, but not all schismatics are heretics. The Macedonian Orthodox Church is in schism with Orthodoxy over an administrative/organizational issue: autocephaly, but they are not heretics.


As the dogmatics professor replied to the seminarian who feared that an erroneous doctrinal answer in class had made him an heretic, "You, my dear, are not important enough to be an heretic."

In Christ,
Andrew

WHAT A RELIEF! LOL :rolleyes:

duplicate deleted

No - current cannons are just a bit more developed from the past. There has been no essential changes. If the histories that you are reading seem to say otherwise then these histories and their authors have been highly influenced by their emotions - or - (and more likely) the real culprit is the same old problem of reading the history of the church without knowing the context of the times and social circumstances. All writings of the church need to be nailed down to a specific time and culture and set of problems facing the church of that time.

As regards Protestants: the cannons of the Roman Catholic church only apply to members of the Roman Catholic church - in the same way that the Laws of the United States only apply to citizens of the United States. The Church has a limit on her mandate from God - to govern her own. These cannons do not apply in any way to someone who was never a member of the Church (today�s Protestant, Buddhist, atheist, etc.). A non-member of the church cannot be declared a heretic in any shape manner or form. They can be said to be in error and that is all.

I recognize that the term heretic and heretical are sometimes used by Catholic theologians (in theoretical context or in error) and priests (in casual context or in error) �. Neither of whom, I remind us, have the authority to form any declarations. Some of these theologians are using these terms in theoretical ways while others would like to run the church.

In thinking about this, think about the fact that Jesus himself refused the role of any kind of intermediate judge (before the moments of his role at �end times� at our death). At all times before our death - the judgment of God is absorbed by Jesus and Jesus acts as our high priest and our friend. It is not the role of friendship to be continually hounding someone because of his errors - you should not raise children like this - friendship looks at the intentions (the heart) and is very tolerant while hoping for improvement. Keep in mind that he was harsh in words (but not by any sentence resulting from a judgment) regarding certain of the Pharisees because they were planning to murder him (an intention of the heart). We must put Jesus� words in human context.

Gnostic writings and some apocrypha often portray some type of immediate and harsh judgment on wrong doers in the way of strange accidents or untimely death caused by God in a manner of revenge... there are just what they are - Gnostic and apocryphal. God does not work that way and Jesus was flabbergasted when it was implied that the tower fell on the pilgrims and killed them because of God's revenge over some great sin the pilgrims had. Notice - "But it shall be much worse for you at the judgement if you do not etc.. etc.." (paraphrased)meaning "It will be much worse for you in reality - at the real judgement - than you have mistakenly imagined for these pilgrims."



-ray

EJKlages,
The definition in the text "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis" was not an instance of the Pope solemnly defining an article of faith.
It was merely a statement that the Church has infallibly taught this truth. There is a difference.
Stephanos I